Thomas Hobbes, in my opinion, didn't give the subject of consciousness enough thought. From his perspective it was more of a popular vote. Locke, on the other hand, gives the subject much more consideration. In Locke's view consciousness is discovered (or examined) through introspection. Today the line blurs. Let's triangulate through the mid 20th century time period of Maslow.
Affective perspectives on emotions assert should as the nucleus of thought when it comes to ethics of the mind. Conative perspectives shift into action. Why is the operative word when it comes to conative impulses and processing associated with conceptualization. What is the operative word for a question already answered. Essentially all cognition takes place in the past. The fourth dimension in this discussion, similar to Maslow in that Freud's theories are limited to small sample sizes. In Maslow's case the top 1% of society (the intellectual elite). With Freud, a multi-decade period of upper middle-class European patients. Hardly all the data.
I bring up Maslow and Freud, not because they are absolutely relevant but they were in their time. Still to this day it's nice reflect and discuss significance and effects. Some ideas should remain in the past, Marxism is no exception.
